I finally want them to put some half-decent UNSC aircraft into the game. The Hornet was unreal and I loved that thing, the Falcon on the other hand was a bit stupid IMO. I mean come on, it’s a helicopter in the mid-2500’s, I’ve seen more advanced helos in modern times. They should also for the next game upgrade the UNSC forces a little( The Marines’ armor looks like hockey padding), and not keep them at a mediocre level of technology. The game would be great if the UNSC actually looked like it put that Forerunner tech to good use. The Scorpion is another issue, sure you don’t fix what ain’t broke, but that tank is old as hell, they should’ve come out with an alternative for it by that time.
So… your reason for hating the Falcon is that it has rotors rather than propulsion jets (it actually uses a combination of the two)?
As for the Scorpion, it works for gameplay and has maintained effectiveness in the UNSC’s arsenal, even against the Covenant and rising Promethean threat. I wouldn’t necessarily mind a variant or so of the iconic vehicle, but replacing it doesn’t make much sense (especially when your reason for wanting a replacement is basically “Its old.”) Sadly enough, the Scorpion has nearly been replaced by the Mantis already (considering how 343i has changed the one multiplayer map that had the Scorpion [Exile] to use the Mantis instead)… That’s actually pretty ironic.
> I finally want them to put some half-decent UNSC aircraft into the game. The Hornet was unreal and I loved that thing, the Falcon on the other hand was a bit stupid IMO. I mean come on, it’s a helicopter in the mid-2500’s, I’ve seen more advanced helos in modern times. They should also for the next game upgrade the UNSC forces a little( The Marines’ armor looks like hockey padding), and not keep them at a mediocre level of technology. The game would be great if the UNSC actually looked like it put that Forerunner tech to good use. The Scorpion is another issue, sure you don’t fix what ain’t broke, but that tank is old as hell, they should’ve come out with an alternative for it by that time.
The Horrent is an outdate piece of junk, the vehicle it self falls under the category that the Scorpion is in, very bad vehicle design/engineering. They should replace the Hornnet with the sparrowhawk. The Falcon was semi-ok, they could replace the rotters with something more advanced. The Pelican is multi ton aircraft and it uses tiny jets to take off, the Falcon can do with some tiny jets.
The Marine BDU does indeed need to step up then what we are seeing in H4, more armor, an exoskeleton, more advanced technology put into the gear, etc. And the weapons, they need a major rework.
The quote don’t fix was ain’t broke is funny because the Scorpion compared to the Abrams was something that contradicts that line. Ok engineers, we are going to develop an awesome tank that will put 20/21 century tanks in shame. First we are going to make the tank huge, second we are going to give it an engine that will give it a max accretion of 9mph and a max speed of 33mph and then we are going to put a gun that if shot at by an RPG from the back would potently destroy the hole tank, its main gun is a 90mm smooth bore cannon, it shts all over the Abrams that is faster, smaller and has a 120mm cannon. Logic. The Scorpion is broken and needs replacing asap.
> > I finally want them to put some half-decent UNSC aircraft into the game. The Hornet was unreal and I loved that thing, the Falcon on the other hand was a bit stupid IMO. I mean come on, it’s a helicopter in the mid-2500’s, I’ve seen more advanced helos in modern times. They should also for the next game upgrade the UNSC forces a little( The Marines’ armor looks like hockey padding), and not keep them at a mediocre level of technology. The game would be great if the UNSC actually looked like it put that Forerunner tech to good use. The Scorpion is another issue, sure you don’t fix what ain’t broke, but that tank is old as hell, they should’ve come out with an alternative for it by that time.
>
> The Horrent is an outdate piece of junk, the vehicle it self falls under the category that the Scorpion is in, very bad vehicle design/engineering. They should replace the Hornnet with the sparrowhawk. The Falcon was semi-ok, they could replace the rotters with something more advanced. The Pelican is multi ton aircraft and it uses tiny jets to take off, the Falcon can do with some tiny jets.
>
> The Marine BDU does indeed need to step up then what we are seeing in H4, more armor, an exoskeleton, more advanced technology put into the gear, etc. And the weapons, they need a major rework.
>
> The quote don’t fix was ain’t broke is funny because the Scorpion compared to the Abrams was something that contradicts that line. Ok engineers, we are going to develop an awesome tank that will put 20/21 century tanks in shame. First we are going to make the tank huge, second we are going to give it an engine that will give it a max accretion of 9mph and a max speed of 33mph and then we are going to put a gun that if shot at by an RPG from the back would potently destroy the hole tank, its main gun is a 90mm smooth bore cannon, it shts all over the Abrams that is faster, smaller and has a 120mm cannon. Logic. The Scorpion is broken and needs replacing asap.
It’s called balancing according to gameplay. If the Scorpion was a very fast, indestructible piece of machinery, it wouldn’t be very fun to play against, now would it? After all, gameplay triumphs over realism in video games.
Plus, just because its cannon shoots a smaller shell, it doesn’t mean that it’s weaker. The velocity could be much higher, or the explosives in the shell could be far more deadly than anything we have today,
> It’s called balancing according to gameplay. If the Scorpion was a very fast, indestructible piece of machinery, it wouldn’t be very fun to play against, now would it? After all, gameplay triumphs over realism in video games.
>
> Plus, just because its cannon shoots a smaller shell, it doesn’t mean that it’s weaker. The velocity could be much higher, or the explosives in the shell could be far more deadly than anything we have today,
I don’t care about gameplay, it can remain as it is gameplay wise. Just wish it had better canon stats so as not to make the UNSC look as stupid as it already is.
It can still look as it is, but for 343i to give a reason why is so big and why does it have a 90mm cannon when it’s so big. Increase its speed (canon wise) and armament. Because right now the Scorpion is a joke.
> As for the Scorpion, it works for gameplay and has maintained effectiveness in the UNSC’s arsenal, even against the Covenant and rising Promethean threat.
It works because the Covenant do not have an actual MBT (instead, they have a self-propelled-artillery vehicle that is trying to act as an tank) and the Prometheans as portrayed thus far are the Forerunner Equivalent of a Special Olypmic’s Team and constructed from putty and balsa wood.
> It’s called balancing according to gameplay. If the Scorpion was a very fast, indestructible piece of machinery, it wouldn’t be very fun to play against, now would it? After all, gameplay triumphs over realism in video games.
And yet games like Battlefield, Crysis, and Frontlines have managed fast, competently designed battle tanks that didn’t shatter gameplay into a million pieces. (Hell, Battlefield’s tanks can even be repaired in mid-battle by someone packing a power tool. How’s that for taking realism and shoving it into a hole?)
Please note that excuse also fails to excuse the Scorpion’s numerous other shortcomings, like its ridiculously high design profile (nearly twice that of a properly designed MBT), the fact that its lacking in secondary weaponry (its machinegun being a 7.62 NATO spewing pea-shooter, (not something ideal for taking on power armored gorilla-bears, among other things)), secondary weaponry that cannot cover the entirety of the tank, and whose design mandates a hole in the tank’s armor.
> Plus, just because its cannon shoots a smaller shell, it doesn’t mean that it’s weaker. The velocity could be much higher, or the explosives in the shell could be far more deadly than anything we have today,
The Scorpion’s 90mm cannon is explicitly stated to not have had any major improvements made to it over that of the modern day cannon, nor does its performance in the books indicate that its some radical, all powerful death cannon. Indeed, there’s at least one statement floating around there that it fires “Armor Piercing Ball-Cap ammunition”, though its canonicity is somewhat in doubt (and I hope to god it isn’t canon, because that would mean the UNSC was using an ammunition type that has been considered useless and obsolete since the beginning of the Korean War…)
> And yet games like Battlefield, Crysis, and Frontlines have managed fast, competently designed battle tanks that didn’t shatter gameplay into a million pieces. (Hell, Battlefield’s tanks can even be repaired in mid-battle by someone packing a power tool. How’s that for taking realism and shoving it into a hole?)
In the context of games like Battlefield, players can spawn with anti-vehicular weapons/equipment (with the Engineer class being specifically designed to deal with vehicles). Unless every Halo player has this capacity, then the Scorpion shouldn’t be redesigned/replaced to make it far more resilient and quick… and I genuinely hope we can all agree that allowing everyone to spawn with Rocket Launchers in Halo has no place other than in whimsical gametypes like Rockets.
The Scorpion does its job, and does its job well without being overpowered or having near-invulnerability. There is no need to replace it in such a way.
It’s funny how the UNSC have maneuverable, fast space aircraft but their ground to surface aircraft are terribly cumbersome and slow.
> It’s funny how the UNSC have maneuverable, fast space aircraft but their ground to surface aircraft are terribly cumbersome and slow.
The ones that appear in multiplayer, yes. That’s intentionally done to differentiate their play-styles from that of the Banshee. If multiplayer had included more aerodynamic and swift UNSC aircraft, then either it or the Banshee would seem rather redundant.
> It’s funny how the UNSC have maneuverable, fast space aircraft but their ground to surface aircraft are terribly cumbersome and slow.
For gameplay purposes. Canon, mongoose and warthog are pretty nice.
Firstly, my apologies in the delay in posting a response. I am suffering from a series of computer problems (I think the blasted thing is on its way out, given that system restores, windows reinstalls, and a host of other fixes have failed to take, leaving me to suspect a hardware failure is the source of the issue), and something that has come up on the domestic side of things that is eating up a great deal of my time as I try to keep my parents separated from one another and both of them from doing something incredibly stupid.
I’ll try to be more prompt in the future.
> In the context of games like Battlefield, players can spawn with anti-vehicular weapons/equipment (with the Engineer class being specifically designed to deal with vehicles). Unless every Halo player has this capacity, then the Scorpion shouldn’t be redesigned/replaced to make it far more resilient and quick… and I genuinely hope we can all agree that allowing everyone to spawn with Rocket Launchers in Halo has no place other than in whimsical gametypes like Rockets.
Setting aside that Crysis and Frontlines don’t allow for that… you say that as if Halo 4 didn’t already allow the players to spawn with an anti-vehicle weapon (and one that has a high capacity for fire, lock on capacity, and the like). Any team with basic coordination will have a group of active camo’d guys ambush the tank and ripple fire their plasma pistols while someone else plants plasma grenades (or just took the “more or less in all ways superior Gauss Hog” and pelted the tank with utter impunity). It’s to the point where the tank was a bloody death trap to be avoided at all costs, unless you were trying to ensure that the other team’s members could rack up their multi-kill achievements as quickly as possible.
There are ways to redesign the Scorpion without unbalancing it. Lower the targeting profile, for one thing, add more guns for another (and reposition where said guns are located (moving the turret closer to the center, bringing back the co-ax gun, changing the location of the secondary machinegun etc.). You can increase the speed a little without overpowering it and the like.
And its more than just the game balance stuff. Fluff wise, the Scorpion is lacking even in the most basic of modern day offensive and defensive technologies. It has no reactive armor, a great deal of shot traps, no smoke, flares, chaff or other type grenades to obscure vision, or throw off heat-seeker or radar guided missiles and the like. They don’t have to be available for gameplay purposes, just have them as visual additions to the tank (again, games such as Crysis have these things mounted on the tank, but you cannot actually use them, this allows for a preservation of game balance (though in Crysis’ case, the rocket launcher is a laser guided weapon, so how much effect it would have even if allowed is debatable) without making the tank’s designers look like first graders without the slightest understanding of why tanks are built the way they are). This isn’t even including the use of futuristic technologies the UNSC should have available to it and that could be included if the game designers wanted to get creative. For example, the use of a gauss turret (fluff wise, the Gauss Hog’s cannon hits for at least, at its most utter lowballing, three times the power of the Scorpion’s 90mm, thus leading to the issue of why in god’s name the UNSC hasn’t just bolted a Gauss turret onto the blasted thing already, and thus making them look like total idiots incapable of taking advantage of what future tech they do have), the use of point defense weaponry to disrupt and destroy incoming missile fire (concerned about game balance? Limit it to the campaign, just like the Mantis’ 20mm vulcan cannon was limited to the SP and Spartan Ops sections, and in MM was replaced by a low ROF, highly inaccurate autocannon) and the use of something akin to the experiential ceramics that they’re working with now, which get harder and stronger when you run an electrical current through them, and of course, a shielding system (if they’re willing to mount one on that abomination known as the Mantis, why they’re not bolting them onto Scorpions is something of a head scratcher moment).
We’re not asking for the UNSC to suddenly start fielding Mark Thirty Three Bolos here, we’re simply asking for them to field a tank that actually looks and fluff-wise acts like a tank with at least some technological advancement. We’re not asking that you make it an aim-bot like modern tanks actually are (with targeting computers that adjust for movement, projectile drop, air pressure, cross/head/tail winds, and even course corrections for the minute distortions in the barrel caused by the rapid heating and cooling of firing the 120mm), we just ask that you mention that it has such things. In the end, all we ask is an intelligent, competent design that doesn’t look like an art major slapped it together in five minutes and would cause an actual tanker to take his field manual and begin bashing said art-major over the head with it until he could recite the tank’s operating parameters in his sleep.
A great many of us are tired of the UNSC being reduced to drooling dunderheads that shouldn’t be trusted with a potato gun, let alone the future of Humanity’s fledgling stellar civilization.
> The Scorpion does its job, and does its job well without being overpowered or having near-invulnerability. There is no need to replace it in such a way.
The Scorpion only succeeds in its job because it has no real competition, aside from the Gauss Hog (which will beat it hands down, 90% of the time due to its much more powerful weapon, faster ROF, and smaller targeting profile). With five hundred years of technological advancement at their beck and call, I should not be able to take a single modern day M1A2 or Challenger MBT and utterly destroy an entire armored company of UNSC MBTs, which I assure you, as of right now, I most assuredly can. The Scorpion, in sum, is nothing more than a case of “in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”
>
What the Scorpion should have been?
And from the size of the shell casing, the scorpions 90mm cannon might actually be less powerful then then modern 90mm artillery shells.
The funny thing is the H4 EVG says that the people or the company who originally manufactured the Scorpion for the UNSC was destroyed during a glassing of a planet or something and another company took the blue prints and made some adjustments or improvements (improvements my -Yoink-).
343i killed the people who made the abomination that is the Scorpion MBT only to put their own version of the company to make the exact same tank. 343i had a chance to fix everything that was wrong with the Scorpion and they did nothing.